Posted on 08/18/2006 8:47:18 AM PDT by MNJohnnie
A couple of articles why the NSA ruling by the Carter Appointee is so much garbage.
http://levin.nationalreview.com/
By Mark Levin
Judge Not
Are there no limits to which activist judges wont go to advance their political and policy agendas? Answer: No. I wrote an entire book about it. And U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, appointed in the twilight of the Carter administration, is the latest in a long list of disgraceful lawyers who abuse their power.
There are four things that strike me most about Taylors opinion. First, she grants standing to such plaintiffs as the ACLU, CAIR, Greenpeace, National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Christopher Hitchens, and others, without a shred of information showing any connection between the plaintiffs assertions of constitutional violations and any harm to them. However, Taylor reveals herself in this excerpt from her ruling:
[T]he court need not speculate upon the kind of activity the Plaintiffs want to engage in they want to engage in conversations with individuals abroad without fear that their First Amendment rights are being infringed upon. Therefore, this court concludes that Plaintiffs have satisfied the requirement of alleging actual or threatened injury as a result of Defendants conduct
Taylor writes later:
Although this court is persuaded that Plaintiffs have alleged sufficient injury to establish standing, it is important to note that if the court were to deny standing based on the unsubstantiated minor distinctions drawn by Defendants, the Presidents action in warrantless wiretapping, in contravention of FISA, Title III, and the First and Fourth Amendments, would be immunized from judicial scrutiny.
In other words, if Taylor had ruled properly and found that the Plaintiffs had no standing to bring their lawsuit, she would have denied herself the ability to strike down the NSA intercept program by throwing out the lawsuit.
Second, Taylor fails to address adequately that which has been debated here and elsewhere for months, i.e., the presidents inherent constitutional powers as commander-in-chief, and the long line of court cases (and historical evidence) related to it.
Third, in many places, the opinion reads like a political screed.
Fourth, Taylor insists on the immediate implementation of her decision, meaning that the NSA must stop intercepting enemy communications at this very moment, unless it succeeds in getting judicial relief elsewhere.
The ACLU et al have won the day, as they often do these days when they take their agenda to our courts. Forum shopping works. The judiciary does not.
The opinion is here. (H/T: Andy McCarthy)
UPDATE: This from the Justice Department: "The parties have also agreed to a stay of the injunction until the District Court can hear the Department's motion for a stay pending appeal."
UPDATE II: Just to be clear, Taylor ruled that the president/NSA violated the FISA, Title III, the First and Fourth Amendments, and the Separation of Powers doctrine.
If I remember right, my dad used to say the fish bit less the hotter the water got.
Go George! "People who herald this decision simply don't understand the world in which we live." EXCELLENT!
Okie, I can do that.
Cubicle bound
Rushbo:
Russ Feingold: "today's ruling is strong rebuke of admin's illegal wiretapping program"
FISA Court allows it....DUmocrats deeply saddened, so they go JUDGE SHOPPING!
I've got a 14' jon boat with platforms fore and aft. Nice set-up for a one man operation. 10hp kicker allows me to get into lakes w/limits. Bow mount elec. trolling motor with foot controls and a cooler full of Coke or sweet tea.
Besides, I might have some brilliant comments there :) Well, maybe not.
That these scumbag liars keep refering to it as "Wiretapping" indicates they have NO idea at all what they are talking about.
Cubicle bound
Rushbo:
"It will be written into law (overturning the ruling)
"If you win the house in 06, then you(left) will have to tear it down
"In a way, if u strip away utter outrageousness of it.... democrats will end up dying on this one way or the other
Feingold obviously hasn't read the actual ruling. Just the talking points his handlers give him.
Strong rebuke my butt....
LOL! All three came out of 30' of water.
Similar with them crying "illegal domestic eavesdropping"
evets post picture. This is also my Ping for lunch.
Interesting--Rush thinks Feingold is the most likely Democrat presidential nominee in '08.
This decision is going to be over turned so fast it won't even be done on one side. If the Appeals Court doesn't over turn it, then the SC will. The program so obviously doesn't violate the Constition or any Amendment. Especially since it's been made clear that the program never monitors calls that are both made from and to the U.S., only calls that are ether from other countries, or to other countries. End of story, not unconstitutional, and The only way someone can say that it violates FISA, is if they haven't read that Act. This is such a joke. Just an old liberal lower level activist Judge, who's so inept she's been stuck in the lower courts for nearly 30 years. Pathetic career so far as Judges go, but then look who appointed her.
Setting the Record Straight: Democrats Continue to Attack Terrorist Surveillance Program
The subject in a nutshell. The Dems are welcome to try to refute the facts.
I take it one day at a time. I never make major plans, that way I'm never dissapointed. When the sun drops behind my hill later, I have to hack back my mums. They're full of buds but I don't want them to bloom yet.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.